Re: RAT Re: John Sylvain and "grammar"

[gaby@whirl-i-gig.com]

uh, I mean "its" form...

You wrote:

> From: gaby@whirl-i-gig.com
> To: rat-list@whirl-i-gig.com
> Cc: rat-list@whirl-i-gig.com
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 10:00:36 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: RAT Re:  John Sylvain and "grammar"
> 
> 
> Speaking as one of the "pedants, schoolmarms and style mavens"... first, don't you know we're obsessive/compulsive?  We know we'll never be as cool as you style-slinging cowboys, but we can't help it.  So even though some of us can't always hide our affliction, be nice and give us a break.  And in our defense... an apple is perfect because it's nutritious and tasty, yes, but also because it's form is appealing and seductive.
> 
> 
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> > From: TravSD@aol.com
> > To: rat-list@whirl-i-gig.com
> > Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 04:53:13 EDT
> > Subject: RAT Re:  John Sylvain and "grammar"
> > 
> > 
> > Yo, John Sylvain--Shakespeare didn't give a fuck about grammar because no 
> > dogma about english grammar existed in the Elizabethen period! He is the 
> > master of the split infinitive, the mixed metaphor, and the extra foot of 
> > meter-- in short, he is a great writer simply BECAUSE he bent the language to 
> > his will and the fucking pedants, schoolmarms and "style mavens" hadn't yet 
> > spread their feces around the field of human expression, straight-jacketing 
> > the very words as they escape from our brains. Fuck the details! so said 
> > Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Plautus, Rabelais, Shakespeare, Chaucer and Walt 
> > Whitman and so say I. Trav S.D.
> > 
> > 
> 
>